The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) rendered a decision on November 24, 2020, in a dispute between the Cameroonian Football Federation (FECAFOOT) and New Stars de Douala, a football club. The case originated from modifications to competition regulations by the Cameroonian Professional Football League (LFPC), which altered relegation rules during the 2018-2019 season, initially stipulating one club's relegation but later amending it to relegate three clubs, including New Stars de Douala. The club challenged these changes, leading to a series of legal proceedings.
The dispute involved procedural and substantive legal issues, including the admissibility of late submissions, the nullity of decisions due to procedural defects, and the substitution of parties in arbitration. The CAS emphasized that Article R56 of its Code requires parties to submit all facts and evidence with their initial appeal or response, barring late submissions unless exceptional circumstances exist or both parties consent. The panel also clarified that under Swiss law, a decision is null if it suffers from severe formal or material defects, such as being issued by an incompetent authority.
FECAFOOT suspended the LFPC in 2019, citing repeated violations of its obligations, and transferred its powers to an interim committee. New Stars de Douala contested this suspension, arguing it was procedurally flawed and lacked proper justification. The CAS examined whether the suspension was validly confirmed by FECAFOOT’s General Assembly, finding that the agenda for the meeting did not clearly indicate a vote on the suspension, and the LFPC was not given a fair opportunity to defend itself. The panel concluded that the suspension was invalid due to procedural irregularities, including insufficient evidence of serious violations and a lack of proportionality in the decision.
FECAFOOT appealed a decision by the Conciliation and Arbitration Chamber of the Cameroonian National Olympic Committee, which had ruled in favor of New Stars de Douala. The CAS assessed whether FECAFOOT had standing to appeal, given that it was not a party to the original proceedings. The panel determined that the LFPC, not FECAFOOT, was the rightful party to appeal, as the LFPC had been reinstated by the time of the appeal. The CAS rejected FECAFOOT’s appeal, finding no legal grounds for its substitution in the proceedings.
The case highlighted the importance of procedural discipline in arbitration, the strict conditions for admitting late evidence, and the complexities of governance disputes within football federations. The CAS underscored that sports governing bodies must adhere to their own statutes and procedural fairness when enacting regulatory changes. The final decision dismissed FECAFOOT’s appeal, upheld the Conciliation and Arbitration Chamber’s ruling, and confirmed the reinstatement of the LFPC’s authority to organize professional football in Cameroon. The ruling reinforced the principle that procedural irregularities can invalidate decisions, even in sports governance.